When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Oh the 10 PSI spring was just being used so we didn't blow up the engine with OEM internals. They're not known to hold a bunch of boost With the new engine the plan was to max the boost out as soon as possible to pump up that torque curve.
Hmmm.. I can see the concern here. There are lots of stock block F20s about that have made well into the 400whp range, just couldn't say how long they may have lasted.
It's a matter of the gate exhaust recirc so close to the turbine and causing an otherwise inefficient spool scenario.
think of what you said and really think about it.. the gate is shut during spool anyways. The tiny wheel in there is proly abut half the diameter of the tube and is a turbulent mess in there wanyways. is like a you blowing down a 3" pvc pipe.
edit- plus all the pressure is on the turbine side between it and the valve. The exhaust psig after turbine is hardly anything. Not saying youre wrong about your thinking, but i would tell my customer to not worry about it unless he is adament about changing it. people do way dumber stuff and make tons of power. (this isnt even dumb, and who ever did it did a wonderful job on the fab work)
think of what you said and really think about it.. the gate is shut during spool anyways.
Gate is shut until requested psi is hit, then opens to vent exhaust past the inlet. Wheel still spins and can't do so very well if it's working in turbulence.
Originally Posted by turbociv910
The tiny wheel in there is proly abut half the diameter of the tube and is a turbulent mess in there wanyways. is like a you blowing down a 3" pvc pipe.
The air the wheel is moving should be going in ONE direction, not bouncing around aimlessly. Imagine blowing through that PVC pipe levitating a ping pong ball.. Now, turn a fan on blowing at the end of that pipe with the ball. What happens to the ball? Gets blown off track doesn't it? THAT'S turbulence..
Originally Posted by turbociv910
edit- plus all the pressure is on the turbine side between it and the valve. The exhaust psig after turbine is hardly anything.
If you say exhaust pressure is next to nothing, you're inferring it doesn't matter. This spits in the face of EVERY engineer that have designed exhaust systems to relieve back pressure.
Originally Posted by turbociv910
Not saying youre wrong about your thinking, but i would tell my customer to not worry about it unless he is adament about changing it. people do way dumber stuff and make tons of power. (this isnt even dumb, and who ever did it did a wonderful job on the fab work)
Make no mistake here; I'm not stating the fab work isn't a work of art, I'm stating that it's less than efficient. There is an opportunity to capitalize on how much more wonderful it COULD be. Think about how many times you've face palmed yourself over somebody's "dumb" **** and thought, "If only this and this were different, you'd do this much better."
Gate is shut until requested psi is hit, then opens to vent exhaust past the inlet. Wheel still spins and can't do so very well if it's working in turbulence.
The air the wheel is moving should be going in ONE direction, not bouncing around aimlessly. Imagine blowing through that PVC pipe levitating a ping pong ball.. Now, turn a fan on blowing at the end of that pipe with the ball. What happens to the ball? Gets blown off track doesn't it? THAT'S turbulence..
If you say exhaust pressure is next to nothing, you're inferring it doesn't matter. This spits in the face of EVERY engineer that have designed exhaust systems to relieve back pressure.
Make no mistake here; I'm not stating the fab work isn't a work of art, I'm stating that it's less than efficient. There is an opportunity to capitalize on how much more wonderful it COULD be. Think about how many times you've face palmed yourself over somebody's "dumb" **** and thought, "If only this and this were different, you'd do this much better."
Im just saying this guys setup isnt going to even see a marginal difference beucase his waste gate entry angle isnt ideal to HT standards of tear drops and cool factor. I see this stuff all the time and can tell you its no different performance than what youre talking about. Look at ls1 tech where they litterly T the exhasut together to the turbo. You have 2 banks facing eachother and a turbo slapped in the middle. If it showed up on my dyno i would bet it made power i wouldnt even think would be possible.
Fun fact, I had the chance to tune a underground tt viper and the waste gate dump was litterly pointed to the exhaust outlet of the turbo. Still made 1200 whp.
Im just saying this guys setup isnt going to even see a marginal difference beucase his waste gate entry angle isnt ideal to HT standards of tear drops and cool factor.
I understand that's what YOU'RE saying.. What would do well is if you understood that this is ridiculously far from true.
Originally Posted by turbociv910
I see this stuff all the time and can tell you its no different performance than what youre talking about. Look at ls1 tech where they litterly T the exhasut together to the turbo. You have 2 banks facing eachother and a turbo slapped in the middle. If it showed up on my dyno i would bet it made power i wouldnt even think would be possible.
You can also drive a car on 4 flat tires and still get to where you want to go..
Originally Posted by turbociv910
Fun fact, I had the chance to tune a underground tt viper and the waste gate dump was litterly pointed to the exhaust outlet of the turbo. Still made 1200 whp.
I simply lol'd at this one.
I get it, you've tuned your fair share of some jacked up, poorly designed setups and they've managed to make power. Kudos. Like I said above; you can still drive a car from point A to point B on 4 flat tires but that doesn't mean the trip is going to be pleasant. I'll be glad to step down and stand aside if anyone with real knowledge refutes my suggestion.
I'll be glad to step down and stand aside if anyone with real knowledge refutes my suggestion.
I'll step in lol. Everything you've suggested: It's hard to prove whether it would actually make a worthwhile improvement. However I highly doubt it could make anything worse. That is all
I still cannot explain with words how better/easier everything would be would be with a reverse rotation turbo on this setup...(except the shorter intake pipe youll have)
About wastegate recirculation, its not just about turbulence its more about the elevated pressure on the worst spot possible.
Turbochargers work by expanding gasses. Expanding gasses needs pressure differential. Pressure differential is the bigger
the difference in the pressure before(manifold) and after(downpipe) the turbo the better for everything to work.
Honda engines are like race engines efficiency wise. This creates a situation that we have small pressure in the manifold and THAT creates
the need of bigger and better wastegate placement and also the need for wastegate to exhale on the lowest pressure possible(out in the air) again to have the biggest pressure differential.
Once the pressure in the downpipe gets closer to 1 bar, and it will, youll have problems like pressure controll and lack of power per pound of boost. This lack of power would come from
lower turbine efficiency because turbines like pressure difference. Also maybe some knock because youll try more boost to make power and that boost will pool in the manifold creating a
"vicious circle" (φαυλος κυκλος In greek i gogled the translation i hope it makes sence) of more and more inefficiency.
Take your time and move the wastegate much much further downstream. The further in the exhaust te better because gasses cool down and contract and there there is lower pressure.
You can also try to fight turbolance by "needling" that wastegate dumptube inside the downpipe, "pipe inside pipe" style but curving it to the right as we see it closer to the downpipe wall.
That wont help with the added pressure issue but will help to counter the coliding gasses issue youll have now..
I'll step in lol. Everything you've suggested: It's hard to prove whether it would actually make a worthwhile improvement. However I highly doubt it could make anything worse. That is all
I understand the "theory card" position.. "It may work, it may not". There is loads documented proof of how this concept works and I'm asking if anyone may prove how it won't. Your buddy does not have to do anything if he wishes not to, it is his car, and what I suggested is merely an observation and suggestion based on that observation.
What we’ll do is get the new engine and trans installed then tune the new setup as is. Once that is done, we can do some back-to-back runs with the wastegate plumbed as is and with it vented directly to atmosphere and see what the difference is. If it’s substantial, then we will definitely need to work on the wastegate recirc plumbing.
Or hell, for a quicker anwswer, maybe we just try it as-is with the 10 psi spring and see what kind of difference it makes.
What we’ll do is get the new engine and trans installed then tune the new setup as is. Once that is done, we can do some back-to-back runs with the wastegate plumbed as is and with it vented directly to atmosphere and see what the difference is. If it’s substantial, then we will definitely need to work on the wastegate recirc plumbing.
Or hell, for a quicker anwswer, maybe we just try it as-is with the 10 psi spring and see what kind of difference it makes.
That's what I meant. I already know how it runs with the current setup, so just need to do a back-to-back test with the WG plumbed as is vs vented to atmosphere (and plug the WG inlet on the DP, of course).
Originally Posted by TheShodan
Power will not really change. Boost response will due to less backpressure from wastegate venting.
If boost response is better (which I assume means it builds boost more quickly), wouldn't that show up as an improvement in the torque and power curves?
lol, thought this was a turbo recommendation thread guys.
I suppose EFR is out of the question due to your manifold, otherwise I would surmise it being superior to the other options for your use, and will continue to think so until proven otherwise.
Gen2 Gtx3076 is pretty impressive from another build I've seen, and I'm assuming the 3071 is as well. Using a 3071 for 500whp should be a piece of cake and spool very well on your setup. My only other suggestion is, well, I'm going to just leave this here: https://honda-tech.com/forums/forced...12whp-2991155/
What we’ll do is get the new engine and trans installed then tune the new setup as is. Once that is done, we can do some back-to-back runs with the wastegate plumbed as is and with it vented directly to atmosphere and see what the difference is. If it’s substantial, then we will definitely need to work on the wastegate recirc plumbing.
Or hell, for a quicker anwswer, maybe we just try it as-is with the 10 psi spring and see what kind of difference it makes.
On lower boost leveles the problem is consealed once you try to hit your number the beast will show its face.
Originally Posted by TheShodan
Power will not really change. Boost response will due to less backpressure from wastegate venting.
This is a good bet !
I put my money on "it will need more boost to make te same power" !
I suppose EFR is out of the question due to your manifold, otherwise I would surmise it being superior to the other options for your use, and will continue to think so until proven otherwise.
I typed up a full response to this thread a few days ago, half of which was me rambling about the EFR, then deleted it because (similar to the G series in OP's case) I don't think it's worthwhile for him to back-track all the way to the BorgWarner side of the pond. I also feel like the EFR 62's perform proportionately better than their 70/71 series which from what I've seen and heard (never dealt hands on with an EFR 70 myself) they don't spool up quite as nicely as one may expect for OP's intended power.
Overall though, speaking loosely as I've only skimmed the most recent comments to this, I'd say a Gen 2 3071 would fit the bill.
7163 Destroys everthing on -15psi vacuum to 2-3 psi boost. Full boost comes as nomal maybe a little earlier. But for the very quick hit its perfect for cars
that are on and off thrrottle alot. AKA lap time/Sprint/rally cars.
7163 Destroys everthing on -15psi vacuum to 2-3 psi boost. Full boost comes as nomal maybe a little earlier. But for the very quick hit its perfect for cars
that are on and off thrrottle alot. AKA lap time/Sprint/rally cars.
the gen2 GTX3071r spools even faster than the 7163 due to a smaller turbine
the gen2 GTX3071r spools even faster than the 7163 due to a smaller turbine
Really depends more on the profile, than even the size. But yes, based upon the difference of the two profiles, any of the GT30R family would theoretically perform better for recovery spool, but that is also dependent of the compressor wheel profile in conjunction with that same turbine efficiency.
Really depends more on the profile, than even the size. But yes, based upon the difference of the two profiles, any of the GT30R family would theoretically perform better for recovery spool, but that is also dependent of the compressor wheel profile in conjunction with that same turbine efficiency.
the gen2 GTX3071r spools even faster than the 7163 due to a smaller turbine
55/60 turbine VS a 56/63 turbine with 30-40% weight reduction. It wont. IF G25-660 can hit 600 hp, which i highly doubt without overworking the turbo, it will
be faster "600hp turbo" even from the 7163.
Food for thought on the surge line that many times dictates the first psi
Edit if you dont recognise the compressor maps haha 7163 vs 625-660
55/60 turbine VS a 56/63 turbine with 30-40% weight reduction. It wont. IF G25-660 can hit 600 hp, which i highly doubt without overworking the turbo, it will
be faster "600hp turbo" even from the 7163.
Food for thought on the surge line that many times dictates the first psi
Edit if you dont recognise the compressor maps haha 7163 vs 625-660
wrong comparison.. you need both turbine wheel gas flow efficiencies. I'm willing to bet they match better than you think. I've owned both on similar platforms
02-25-2019, 06:11 PM
Re: Turbo selection for 2.1L roadrace engine
